Horrible Numbers For Re-Animated Dirty Tricks

While the turnout model for a June non-Presidential primary is unknown, this should cheer people who don’t want to see California’s electoral votes stolen by an unbalanced dirty trick.

When voters are read the title and summary of the proposed initiative, a solid majority opposes the measure – 53 percent would vote NO if the election were held today and only one out of five voters (22%) support the initiative while a quarter of the electorate (25%) is currently undecided. This is one of the lowest levels of support we have ever seen in our polling for a statewide initiative in California.

It doesn’t sound like this is a tilted poll designed to get a certain result.  It sounds like the months of harping on this both through the netroots and in the media are having an impact.  They may yet get this dud on the ballot, but we’ll crush it on Election Day.

Of course, we wouldn’t even be talking about this if it weren’t for the splitting of the primary races allowing for a low-turnout election in the middle of the summer to be an inviting target for Republican dirty tricksters.  The real reason for moving up the Presidential primary was not just to keep up with the Joneses and “make California heard” in the Presidential process – if that was the goal they’re failing miserably – was to ensure that termed-out lawmakers could serve again in the Legislature, by putting the term limits change on the February ballot in time for them all to run again in June.  And now that initiative is starting to falter.  So the Legislature created the conditions for any number of pernicious Republican ballot measures because they wanted to stay in power – and now they may not even accomplish that.

CA House Races Roundup – October 2007

There’s some real data in the form of third-quarter fundraising numbers to pore over, and events in Washington and at home have served to focus on some of our Congressional candidates here in California.  Plus, believe it or not, we’re only about a year out from Election Day.  Let’s take a look at the top ten races.

As usual, I’m going to rank them in order of most possible pickup, including their number from the last roundup.  I’m also, as usual, including the “Boxer number.”  Basically, seeing how Boxer fared in her 2004 re-election against Bill Jones in a particular district is a decent indicator of how partisan it is.  If I put “57,” that means Boxer received 57% of the vote.  Anything over 50, obviously, is good. (over)

First, let’s look at the one threatened seat currently held by a Democrat.

1) CA-11.  Incumbent: Jerry McNerney.  Main challenger: Dean Andal.  Boxer number: 49.  McNerney had a big fundraising quarter big fundraising year (h/t babaloo), with over a million dollars in receipts, so he obviously won’t suffer from the same cash disadvantage he had in his race against Richard Pombo.  Nearly half of that money, $421,000, came from PACs.  This is not a low-dollar revolution.  Dean Andal has raised plenty of money too, but he’s down 2:1 in cash on hand.  McNerney of late has hammered the SCHIP issue, perhaps as a way to get back in the good graces of some Democrats wary of his votes and rhetoric on other issues.  Andal is trying to blur the lines on the issue.

A spokesman for former California Assemblyman Dean Andal (R), who is seeking Rep. Jerry McNerney’s (D) seat, made a similar remark. “He’s looking at it, like all of us reading a paper,” Richard Temple said. “Until he has all the information, I don’t think he can [definitively] say whether the president is doing the right thing,” Temple said.

The fact is that Andal is trying to reinvent himself as some kind of moderate, when it’s obvious he would be a Republican rubber-stamp.  The question is whether or not McNerney will be able to rally supporters that he represents a true contrast.

Now, to the top 10 challengers.

1) CA-04. Incumbent: John Doolittle.  Main challenger: Charlie Brown.  Last month: 1.  Boxer number: 40.  Doolittle’s money troubles have been well documented, but just today we learned that he has more money in his legal defense fund than he does cash on hand for the campaign.  That should give you an inkling as to his priorities.  Practically everyone in America has been subpoenad to testify in his corruption investigation, and those who haven’t are running against him in the Republican primary (at least 3 challengers, at last count).  Meanwhile, he’s defiant about staying in the race, perhaps because it is making his wife rich – she got another $45,000 from the campaign for “fundraising services” last quarter.  We’re all hoping Doolittle stays in this race and limps across the primary line, because Charlie Brown is poised to crush him.  At this point, Chris Cilizza of the Washington Post has this as the most likely race to flip parties in America. (Interesting side note: Doolittle primary challenger Eric Egland is stealing Brown’s statements for his own website.  More blurring strategy.)

2) CA-26. Incumbent: David Dreier. Main challengers: Russ Warner, Hoyt Hilsman.  Last month: 2.  Boxer number: 48. David Dreier got a wake-up call and started raising money in earnest this quarter for what will be a competitive race.  Russ Warner’s Q3 numbers were good (close to $130K), and he’s doing the smart thing by attacking Dreier on his SCHIP vote.  I like that Hoyt Hilsman is foregrounding the housing crisis, which is particularly acute in this district, as a part of his candidacy.  Whoever comes out of the primary will be able to deliver a strong message of change.  Dreier, meanwhile, will continue to whine about the mean Democrats and really make himself look like a strong leader.

3) CA-50. Incumbent: Brian Bilbray.  Main challenger: Nick Leibham.  Last month: 3.  Boxer number: 48.  Nick Leibham is a serious candidate for Congress in an area that was ravaged by wildfires last week, which may change the dynamic somewhat.  Leibham raised around $50K and has $132,000 CoH, trailing Bilbray by about half, which isn’t a bad spread at this point, honestly.  He actually gained ground this quarter because Bilbray had a lot of expenditures.  Bilbray being on Air Force One when it grounded firefighting aircraft in the midst of the blazes for several hours seems like it could be made into a campaign issue.  Bilbray has one arrow in the quiver, and that’s hating on illegal immigrants.  It defines him to the extent that he’s actually wistful for the imminent departure from Congress of Tom Tancredo.  I’m confident about keeping this in the number 3 position for now, although Leibham must demonstrate support above the Busby ceiling here.

4)) CA-41. Incumbent: Jerry Lewis.  Main challengers: Tim Prince, Dr. Rita Ramirez-Dean, others.  Last month: 8.  Boxer number: 43.  I’m shooting this one back up, as events on the ground have shifted.  First of all, the investigations have restarted, with one Lewis staffer trying to deny a grand jury subpoena.  Second, the Brent Wilkes trial has taken a bizarre turn, leading some to wonder if attorneys are setting up Wilkes to flip on the other Congresscritters he bribed, including Lewis.  So the legal cases are hampering him.  What’s more, new candidates have entered the race.  Tim Prince is officially in, and he’s trying to keep his profile up in the district.  I’ll have more on Dr. Ramirez-Dean later, but she’s also a candidate.  Suffice to say that we will not have the same situation where Lewis handpicked his opponent in 2006.  There will be an actual election.

5) CA-42. Incumbent: Gary Miller.  Main challenger: Ron Shepston.  Last month: 5.  Boxer number: 41.  This is yet another area where the recent wildfires may affect the dynamic of the race.  While Gary Miller was voting against health care for children and keeping a low profile from federal investigators, Ron Shepston walked out of a candidate training summit to find his home in Silverado Canyon being threatened by the Santiago fire.  He got right to work helping local firefighting efforts.  With all of the human interest stories I’ve seen around Southern California the past week, I can’t believe I didn’t see this one: a candidate for Congress pitching in and showing leadership through helping defend his home and the homes of his neighbors from fires.  It’s powerful.  Shepston needs something to click with a larger base of support (his fundraising last quarter was around $25K) and this could be it.

6) CA-45.  Incumbent: Mary Bono.  Main challenger: Paul Clay.  Last month: 10.  Boxer number: 49.  Now that there’s an actual candidate in Paul Clay, I can raise this closer to the level where it should rightfully be.  It remains to be seen whether or not Clay is viable, but certainly the Palm Springs progressive community has been active and vocal and will push to unseat Mary Bono this time around.  Bono immunized herself a bit by voting with Democrats or SCHIP, but there’s still a long record of not supporting the needs of the district.  And marrying a fellow Congressman, to me, shows that she’s really part of the DC establishment and not the area.

7) CA-44.  Incumbent: Ken Calvert.  Main challenger: Bill Hedrick.  Last month: 6.  Boxer number: 45.  Ken Calvert still has an ethical cloud hanging over his head, has a terrible voting record, supported the Dirty Tricks initiative in its initial incarnation, and Bill Hedrick is on the attack.  This is an email he sent out recently, in response to a made up controversy about flag-folding that Calvert decided to take the lead on:

Like many of you, I was amazed that Congressman Calvert’s October 25, 2007 emailed newsletter consisted of a garbled interpretation of American history, Pilgrims, and a controversy regarding the “constituent service” of selling American flags, etc., rather than the real and immediate crisis facing residents of the 44th Congressional District-wildfires and the tragic loss suffered by Californians […]

I join others in praying for an end to the fires and God’s blessing on the victims and firefighters. We need engaged
representatives who will fight full-force to make our federal government responsive here and now.

Projecting an image of a do-nothing Congressman is right in line with what will work next November, IMO.  Hedrick is doing a good job attacks, but needs to make sure he has the resources to fight in this district.

8) CA-24. Incumbent: Elton Gallegly.  Main challengers: Mary Pallant, Chip Fraser, Brett Wagner, Jill Martinez?  Last month: 4  Boxer number: 47.  I just don’t think Elton Gallegly’s retiring this time around, and while I think that if he did there could be some competition here, he far outstrips the rest of the field in money and name ID.  I’d really like to see a viable alternative here because it might help downticket races (SD-19!), but none is forthcoming as of yet.  I like Mary Pallant a lot but an $1,100 3rd quarter isn’t going to cut it.

9) CA-52. Incumbent: None.  Republican challenger: Duncan L. Hunter.  Democratic challengers: Jim Hester, Mike Lumpkin.  Last month: 7.  Boxer number: 44.  Mike Lumpkin raised some serious money, around $50,000 in a short amount of time, to challenge this open seat.  I still think that it’s going to be hard to run against someone who will be serving in Iraq or Afghanistan during the election, potentially, and in addition, Duncan Hunter the pére has raised his profile enough that low-information Republicans will go to the polls thinking that he’s the candidate, giving a fake level of incumbency to his namesake.

10) CA-03.  Incumbent: Dan Lungren.  Main challenger: Bill Durston.  Last month: 9.  Boxer number: 42.  Nothing much to report here, although Bill Durston does have a MySpace page.  Akogun’s reports on the race have been very enlightening.  Give it up for candidates doing the hard work in red counties.

My 6 Years are Better than your 6 Years

Tim Herdt, of the Ventura County Star, brings up a very good point about the Term limits initiative, Prop 93. Put simply, why are termed-out legislators still termed out if they've only served 6 years? So, here's the example of the Stricklands:

How unequal would Proposition 93 be? Well, it would, for example, apply differently to two members of the same Moorpark household. Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, elected in 2004, would be permitted to serve 12 years. But her husband, Tony, who preceded her in office and served six years, would never be eligible to run again. The silliness of such an arrangement brings to mind what former Sen. David Roberti, the first person termed out under the existing law, used to say about term limits: “There are two classes of people prohibited by law from running for the state Senate: convicted felons and David Roberti.”  (Ventura Star 10/31/07)

Sure, I'm not going to cry for Tony Strickland, but here's the deal: Tony Strickland can't run for the Assembly seat, but Audra can? Does that make any sense at all?  Listen, we desperately need term limits reform, and I'm on board, but the way this was done sure makes me hold my nose. And the poll results are showing that now too.  According to the most recent Field Poll(PDF),  support for the term limits initiative fell from 59% in August to 49% in October. While that still gives a healthy 18% advantage, it's a marked decline in a short period of time. In fact, right now the term limits reform initiative seems to be working on some level at tricking Republicans.  Current Dem support of the measure is running 44-34 in favor of Yes, while Rep support is running 57-29 in favor of Yes. Why the discrepancy? Well, Republicans think they're cracking down real hard on the Dems in the Legislature. Gotcha silly red county voters!

This initiative should have happened several years ago, but either way, it shouldn't favor today's legislators over yesterday's. Sure it would make for some bizarre races of past and present legislators in primaries, but, boy, wouldn't that be fun? 

Harold Meyerson on Searching For The California Dream

I’m in the middle of the latest House roundup, but I just wanted to highlight this great opinion piece in the Washington Post, of all places, about the crisis of California’s housing market, and in a larger sense, the crisis of governmental neglect.  The most important paragraph is the last:

Half a century ago, Californians understood what it took to create a great state. Taxpayers funded the nation’s best highway network, water system and public universities. The state’s population exploded in the greatest home-construction boom in history, under a system of mortgages that the federal government tightly regulated. A sustainable California will require a return to the policies of public investment and financial regulation that built the postwar paradise between the Sierras and the sea.

This is quite right.  The far-sighted work of Pat Brown and others made California a destination for those who wanted to live the American dream.  Now, with mortgage meltdowns and insufficient infrastructure, those dreams are being deferred.

It’s a great read, I recommend it.

A tale of Thinly Disguised Racism

Like SF, San Diego has a pretty good weekly, the City Beat. Not that I mean to say that it can measure up to the SF Bay Guardian, but it's not a bad source of information. Plus, there was this awesome piece of journalism a few weeks back.  But, their strength is also a strength of many blogs: media criticism. And, boy do they have much to criticize in the San Diego Union Tribune. Like take this piece of work from U-T Insight Editor Robert Caldwell:

Why did New Orleans suffer a catastrophic breakdown in public order and safety and Katrina become a synonym for the failure of government to meet its most basic responsibilities? And why does San Diego's response to its disaster, by comparison, seem almost a model of efficient, effective response and civic cooperation?

 Well, so, where do you think he went with that one? Yeah, you're right, he went straight for some very thinly disguised racism topped with a dollop of complete ignorance: 

There's one more difference between New Orleans, 2005, and San Diego, 2007. Call it civic culture. In New Orleans, it proved sadly deficient. In San Diego, it's an underlying strength that helped us get through a week of trauma and tragedy.

Call it racist. And the CityBeat goes ahead and lays the smack down on Mr. Caldwell:

First of all, why are these questions worth asking? What, Mr. Caldwell, is the point? We'll get to that later. For now, we'll note that Caldwell has already found the difference. By the economic-damage measure, using his numbers, he's pointed out that Katrina was 20 times worse (other sources put the property cost of Katrina as high as $81 billion). And why omit other numbers, such as the death toll and the number of people permanently displaced? Katrina killed more than 1,800 people, displaced roughly 770,000 and destroyed about 300,000 homes. The recent wildfires killed  12 (we certainly do not mean to diminish their awful loss), temporarily disrupted the lives of half a million and destroyed less than 1,300 homes. No comparison.

***

First, the Superdome was surrounded by water, thanks to the levee breaks. Relief and supplies could not get to the evacuees. Qualcomm was nowhere near the burn areas and was easily accessible for anyone who wished to provide help. What Caldwell seems to be saying with his “civic culture” contrast is that the black people of New Orleans don't give a damn about their community or their neighbors while the white people of San Diego do.

In other words, New Orleans was full of toxic water, but you could still move around San Diego. Volunuteers and supplies could get to Qualcomm, that was not true of the SuperDome. Caldwell, of course, goes on to lay all the blame at the feet of Blanco and Nagin, very little was Bush's fault you see. And Arnold was just super on the ball! As CityBeat summed up:

You deserve better than this GOP-ass-kissing drivel. 

ICE Out of Emeryville! Rally Opposing Woodfin and Bilbray’s Dirty Tactics

From noon to 1pm tomorrow, immigrant rights activists will be rallying in Oakland (1500 Broadway) in protest of ICE performing employee harassment and intimidation on behalf of a well-connected hotel CEO who doesn’t feel like adhering to a living wage law.  If you’re in the area, go out and tell ICE to stop attacking workers rights.  And if you can’t be there in person, you can call Special Agent Charles DeMore at (510) 267-3800 and tell him that ICE shouldn’t be involving itself in the enforcement (or lack thereof) of local labor laws.

A month ago, Brian wrote on Calitics about Rep. Brian Bilbray’s meddling in Bay Area living wage issues.  He chronicled how workers at the Woodfin hotels in Emeryville were fighting to receive the living wage assured them by Measure C, a local living wage law.  The city is insisting that Woodfin pay the living wage, but unfortunately for the workers, the CEO of Woodfin hotels lives in Brian Bilbray’s district and has contributed enough money to get his phone calls answered.

Some more background on the flip

Cross posted at San Diego Politico

So back in February he had Bilbray call Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in to investigate his own staff.  ICE seized employee files from two local hotels (Woodfin and Hilton Garden Inn), and last month it returned to the Hilton to arrest a dishwasher who had worked there 18 years and with a list of 12 employees that must be fired immediately.  ICE agents have also reportedly visited the home of a Woodfin employee leader explicitly because she’d spoken publicly about the issue.  So not only did Woodfin CEO Sam Hardage call down ICE on his own staff rather than pay them decently and legally, and not only does he have federal immigration officers doing his employee intimidation for him, he also managed to call the feds on his local competition and only get members of their staff fired.  Paying to be connected sure pays off.

If Brian Bilbray were really concerned about any sort of immigration enforcement, he’d be holding employers accountable instead of calling in favors for campaign contributors.  He wouldn’t be wasting the ICE’s time meddling in local labor issues or muddying the waters between immigration law and fair wage practices.  If he had any respect for the rule of law or the rights of localities to legislate local issues, he wouldn’t be using federal agents to intimidate workers who only want the law to be enforced and he wouldn’t be helping a campaign contributor refuse to acknowledge the law in the first place.  But as usual, it’s politics of the expedient power grab, with Bilbray rewarding the big bucks and betraying any semblance of principle.  It’s about creating victims and criminals but never calling into question the campaign contributors that criminalize and victimize so many people.  It’s about ignoring the law if your monetary backers tell you to.

My 6 Years are better than your 6 Years!

Tim Herdt, of the Ventura County Star, brings up a very good point about the Term limits initiative, Prop 93. Put simply, why are termed-out legislators still termed out if they've only served 6 years? So, here's the example of the Stricklands:

How unequal would Proposition 93 be? Well, it would, for example, apply differently to two members of the same Moorpark household. Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, elected in 2004, would be permitted to serve 12 years. But her husband, Tony, who preceded her in office and served six years, would never be eligible to run again. The silliness of such an arrangement brings to mind what former Sen. David Roberti, the first person termed out under the existing law, used to say about term limits: “There are two classes of people prohibited by law from running for the state Senate: convicted felons and David Roberti.”  (Ventura Star 10/31/07)

Sure, I'm not going to cry for Tony Strickland, but here's the deal: Tony Strickland can't run for the Assembly seat, but Audra can? Does that make any sense at all?  Listen, we desperately need term limits reform, and I'm on board, but the way this was done sure makes me hold my nose. And the poll results are showing that now too.  According to the most recent Field Poll(PDF),  support for the term limits initiative fell from 59% in August to 49% in October. While that still gives a healthy 18% advantage, it's a marked decline in a short period of time. In fact, right now the term limits reform initiative seems to be working on some level at tricking Republicans.  Current Dem support of the measure is running 44-34 in favor of Yes, while Rep support is running 57-29 in favor of Yes. Why the discrepancy? Well, Republicans think they're cracking down real hard on the Dems in the Legislature. Gotcha silly red county voters!

This initiative should have happened several years ago, but either way, it shouldn't favor today's legislators over yesterday's. Sure it would make for some bizarre races of past and present legislators in primaries, but, boy, wouldn't that be fun? 

Bringing Your Messages to the Governor

(Disclosure: I am an online organizer for It’s OUR Healthcare!)

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s healthcare ‘proposal’ — to require everyone to buy insurance, whether or not they can afford it and regardless of whether it actually protects them — will be heard before the Assembly Health Committee in Sacramento today.

While the Governor’s proposal gets further scrutiny from California lawmakers, none of whom from either party is willing to carry, Californians have already made up their mind. $5,000 deductibles is not “affordable healthcare.”

It’s OUR Healthcare! is currently holding a rally on the steps of the State Capitol. Can’t make it to Sacramento? Text IOH to 30644. We are displaying your text messages sent in by thousands of Californians here at the Capitol and streaming them on the web.

Snag the code for the really cool text message display seen on the live feed over the flip.

Do Not Play With Matches

The Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department has stated that the Buckweed fire, which burned 38,000 acres and 21 homes last week in Agua Dulce and Santa Clarita was started by a young boy playing with matches. The L.A. times is reporting that the boy has admitted to playing with matches. He’s been released to his parents. The Sheriff’s Department will not release his name, age or location. The case has also been referred to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office.

“We have identified a juvenile boy as the person who started the fire,” said Steve Whitmore, a department spokesman. “Arson investigators interviewed the young man, and he acknowledged he had been playing with matches and
accidentally started a fire.”

emphasis in quote is mine.

Firefighters are still battling fires across the State and expect to have them contained by the end of the week. They’re being aided slightly by cooling temperatures and rising humidity. And as a closing admonition. Please be careful with matches. Store them out of reach of children.

The VA Gets a Nominee… FINALLY!

HILSMAN FOR CONGRESS – THE VA GETS A NOMINEE… FINALLY!

Instead of quickly finding an effective and suitable nominee when the former Secretary for Veterans Affairs announced his resignation in July, Bush has waited until a month after that resignation has become effective – four months later – to find a replacement, leaving a near powerless “acting” secretary to manage the post-duty health and welfare of our troops and the second largest department in the federal government.

We here at the Hilsman for Congress campaign think some important questions must be raised though, especially after Bush’s thoughtless threat to veto an appropriations increase for that department earlier this year, after squalid conditions were reported in Walter-Reed and record numbers of troops with Post Traumatic Stress return from the bludgeoning conditions in Iraq and Afghanistan  only to be misdiagnosed or completely untreated.

The nominee, retired Army Lt. General James Peake, was the U.S. Army surgeon general from 2000-2004, when he left active duty. Unfortunately that calls into doubt General Peake’s competence, for if he didn’t know about the awful conditions at Walter Reed, how could he possibly be a competent and effective choice? If he did know about it, why did he do nothing to solve the problem for our nations troops? Though he would be the first physician or general to head the VA, America’s troops and citizens are tired of good Public Relations pomp and need a real candidate for this job! Not another lackey or superficially qualified potential failure. Scant details have emerged so far about what kind of Secretary Gen. Peake would be but his apparent negligence in the case of the Walter-Reed scandal is alarming!

Even more disturbing, Gen. Peake has served as the COO and medical director of QTC Management Inc., a company the over burdened VA sub-contracts to manage veterans health care. This in of itself is not a fault necessarily, but after so many of the administrations ethically questionable appointments and dealings, can the VA afford another potentially embattled head who’s past business dealings could be used to further profit himself or his associates? The last thing the VA needs is another scandal.

We hope the Senate holds rigorous hearings and keeps Gen. Peake and the administration accountable during his testimony and his tenure, should he be confirmed. The VA needs competent leadership, now more than ever – funding it adequately and keeping watchful oversight would be one of Hoyt Hilsman’s highest priorities upon taking office as part of the 111th Congress in 2009.